2007 DAN Report--gas management fatalities

[boulderjohn]

The recent discussion piqued my curiosity, so I examined every case file from the DAN 2007 report for fatalities (year studied = 2005) to look at the characteristics of those associated with low on air or out of air situations. I wanted to know who these people were and why they were running out of air. I started off by counting everything that mentioned an empty or near empty tank. I eliminated a few that were really caused by entanglement, meaning that running out of air was a result more than a cause--there were only a couple. In two curious cases the heading of the incident mentioned a low air situation, but the detailed descriptions did not; in fact, the deaths in those cases clearly had no relationship to any air situation whatsoever.

I also did not include a cave diving incident in which there was clearly a skill mishap when the diver did not handle his posts correctly--his tanks were not out of air.

I did not include two rebreather divers who died testing their equipment in a pool.

Just to be clear, I would have included this recent case of the Oregon couple if it had been part of the report, since being low on air was a contributing factor regardless of any other factors involved..

Anyway, here is what I found.

There were 15 cases that involved low on air or out of air as a contributing cause.

Here is how DAN broke the cases down by training/experience level of the diver (they had trouble telling for sure sometimes):

Unknown: 1

Inexperienced:3
Two were also described as being signficantly overweighted. The other did a solo single tank dive to 163 feet for 25 minutes, according to his computer.

Moderate experience:3
In placing people in this catergory, I either used DAN's description or a number of dives greater than 25.

Experienced: 3
This includes a cavern certified diver who decided to do a complex cave dive. It also includes one that probably should not be included at all--his air was not turned on.

Highly trained and experienced: 5
This includes a public safety diver, a tech diver, a rebreather diver, an instructor, and a shop owner.

 

[Garrobo]

And your conclusion is what?

 

[bill-da-ho]

were you by chance able to determine from wich agencies these people recieved their training?

 

[boulderjohn]

And your conclusion is what?

I am just presenting the facts. You may draw your own conclusions.

The impetus for my work was some discussions about the fatality levels due to poor instruction in gas management. I thought I would just put those numbers together so that people would have data to work with rather than guesses.

 

[boulderjohn]

were you by chance able to determine from wich agencies these people recieved their training?

There is not a word of that in the report. I would guess that DAN has no way of knowing. They get almost all of their information from incident reports, coroner's reports, etc. That information would not be included in such a report since it is not germane to that purpose. The only one where it might have been possible was with a student who died during a class. (Heart attack, as I recall.)

 

[Diver0001]

The recent discussion piqued my curiosity, so I examined every case file from the DAN 2007 report for fatalities (year studied = 2005) to look at the characteristics of those associated with low on air or out of air situations. I wanted to know who these people were and why they were running out of air. I started off by counting everything that mentioned an empty or near empty tank. I eliminated a few that were really caused by entanglement, meaning that running out of air was a result more than a cause--there were only a couple. In two curious cases the heading of the incident mentioned a low air situation, but the detailed descriptions did not; in fact, the deaths in those cases clearly had no relationship to any air situation whatsoever.

I also did not include a cave diving incident in which there was clearly a skill mishap when the diver did not handle his posts correctly--his tanks were not out of air.

I did not include two rebreather divers who died testing their equipment in a pool.

Just to be clear, I would have included this recent case of the Oregon couple if it had been part of the report, since being low on air was a contributing factor regardless of any other factors involved..

Anyway, here is what I found.

There were 15 cases that involved low on air or out of air as a contributing cause.

Here is how DAN broke the cases down by training/experience level of the diver (they had trouble telling for sure sometimes):

Unknown: 1

Inexperienced:3
Two were also described as being signficantly overweighted. The other did a solo single tank dive to 163 feet for 25 minutes, according to his computer.

Moderate experience:3
In placing people in this catergory, I either used DAN's description or a number of dives greater than 25.

Experienced: 3
This includes a cavern certified diver who decided to do a complex cave dive. It also includes one that probably should not be included at all--his air was not turned on.

Highly trained and experienced: 5
This includes a public safety diver, a tech diver, a rebreather diver, an instructor, and a shop owner.

These are very interesting results. A couple of off-the-cuff observations:

- looking that these numbers I'm surprised that there weren't more incidents than this.
- Darwin award winners really should have thier own category
- looking at this data, you would draw the conclusion that lack of training has little correlation to the issue.

R..

 

[300bar]

- looking at this data, you would draw the conclusion that lack of training has little correlation to the issue.

R..

8 out of 15

Experienced: 3
This includes a cavern certified diver who decided to do a complex cave dive. It also includes one that probably should not be included at all--his air was not turned on.

Highly trained and experienced: 5
This includes a public safety diver, a tech diver, a rebreather diver, an instructor, and a shop owner.

The later two I will not take into acount,but the rest where highly trained divers.
IMO OW divers are quite safe.

 

[Steve50]

The recent discussion piqued my curiosity, so I examined every case file from the DAN 2007 report for fatalities (year studied = 2005) to look at the characteristics of those associated with low on air or out of air situations. I wanted to know who these people were and why they were running out of air. I started off by counting everything that mentioned an empty or near empty tank. I eliminated a few that were really caused by entanglement, meaning that running out of air was a result more than a cause--there were only a couple. In two curious cases the heading of the incident mentioned a low air situation, but the detailed descriptions did not; in fact, the deaths in those cases clearly had no relationship to any air situation whatsoever.

There were 15 cases that involved low on air or out of air as a contributing cause.

Here is how DAN broke the cases down by training/experience level of the diver (they had trouble telling for sure sometimes):

Unknown: 1

Inexperienced:3
Two were also described as being signficantly overweighted. The other did a solo single tank dive to 163 feet for 25 minutes, according to his computer.

.

Thanks - helps put a lot of the hand-wringing in another thread into perspective.

 

[lowviz]

Thanks - helps put a lot of the hand-wringing in another thread into perspective.

I see both sides. As a recreational student you follow your instructor around like a puppy dog, as a competent recreational diver you are pretty much thinking for yourself. That particularly dangerous space in between remains devoid of any real gas management skills and and other important self-survival drills. -Maybe because it is counterproductive for agencies to teach complete independence? <Overstated to make a point> The point: The agencies should be hammering away at survival skills from the very beginning. Drop weight, orally inflate. Doing it once in a pool is crap.